If history is a guide, and it often is, then we would be wise to view every ceasefire declared by the Islamicist regime in Tehran with extreme skepticism.

Over the past four decades, Iran’s leadership has demonstrated a consistent pattern: use diplomatic lulls and ceasefires not as pathways to peace, but as strategic pauses to regroup, rearm, and recalibrate.

From the Iran-Iraq War to the post-JCPOA period, Tehran has turned moments of de-escalation into opportunities to fortify its proxies, expand its influence across the Middle East, and deepen its military-industrial reach. Hezbollah in Lebanon, militias in Iraq, and the Houthis in Yemen have all benefited from these pauses in conflict. Rather than signaling a shift in mindset, ceasefires under this regime often reflect tactical necessity, not strategic evolution.

What should concern the United States even more is not only Tehran’s unchanged approach but also the growing international environment that seems increasingly tolerant, or even enabling, of it. The continued election of progressive factions in the West, some of whom align ideologically or strategically with Islamist regimes under the guise of anti-imperialism or intersectional solidarity, is creating a political environment where accountability is selectively applied.

Betrayed by the Democrats

In the United States, we’ve seen elements within the progressive wing of the Democratic Party lend rhetorical and sometimes political support to groups and regimes whose values are fundamentally incompatible with liberal democracy. The term “progressive” is becoming increasingly elastic—capable of stretching to include causes that undermine women’s rights, religious freedom, and minority protections, so long as those causes position themselves as resisting Western “hegemony.”

We have just seen an avowed Islamicist, Zohran Mamdani, win the Democratic primary nomination for the Mayor of New York City under the aegis of the Democratic socialists.

Zohran Mamdani, an avowed Islamicist and Democratic Socialist and State Assemblyman from Queens, has just secured the Democratic primary nomination for Mayor of New York City, marking a historic moment as one of the most prominent Muslim politicians to seek control of America’s largest city.

In recent years, cities such as Dearborn, Michigan, Minneapolis, Minnesota, and Hamtramck, Michigan, have seen growing Islamicist political engagement, reflecting demographic shifts and increased civic participation.

The Canary in the Coalmine: Britain’s Shift: From Blitz Spirit to Appeasement

In Britain, we have witnessed a dramatic and disconcerting shift in public and political sentiment. A nation once defined by its defiance in the face of tyranny, where ordinary citizens endured the Blitz with stoic British resilience as they resisted the Nazi war machine, now finds itself increasingly hesitant, even unwilling, to defend its foundational British values against a rising tide of Islamist ideology.

The British media appear more concerned with appeasement and protecting Islamist sensibilities than defending traditional British values.

Those who speak out against rising Islamicist extremism are dismissed as bigots, while known radicals are legitimized under the banner of multiculturalism. The labels may have changed, but the authoritarian impulse remains: a belief in a superior class of “true believers” demanding submission.

The defiance that once defined Britain is giving way to appeasement. If that trend continues, the nation risks surrendering not to bombs, but to ideological conquest from within.

This inversion of moral clarity would have been unthinkable in the days of Churchill. Today, however, under the banner of multiculturalism and inclusion, the line between tolerance and appeasement has all but vanished. British citizens, descendants of those who withstood Hitler’s rockets, are now expected to silently accept parallel legal systems, honor-based violence, and political movements that seek to replace British democratic values with theocratic rule.

Bottom Line

We are watching not just a regional shift, but a potential global restructuring. If Islamist regimes like Tehran’s can operate with ideological and material cover from segments of the West, particularly those who influence policy under banners of social justice and anti-colonialism, then the geopolitical balance that emerged after World War II is truly in flux.

This isn’t about left vs. right, it’s about clarity vs. delusion. It’s about recognizing that regimes built on religious absolutism, repression, and expansionism do not reform through goodwill gestures or ceasefires. They recalibrate.

And unless the West wakes up to that reality, the coming decades may be shaped less by democratic principles and more by theocratic ambition, ironically enabled by those who claim to fight for progress.

The spirit of America is not just about physical endurance and military might; it is a spiritual resistance to tyranny in all forms. If that spirit is not rekindled, America may find itself yielding, not to a foreign army, but to an internal erosion of everything that once made it great.

We are so screwed.

-- Steve